Which year is the most likely date of POD for an Axis victory in WW2?

Which year is the most likely date of POD for an Axis victory in WW2?

  • 1939

    Votes: 12 13.8%
  • 1940

    Votes: 42 48.3%
  • 1941

    Votes: 16 18.4%
  • 1942

    Votes: 3 3.4%
  • 1943

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1944

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1945

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • Never

    Votes: 13 14.9%

  • Total voters
    87

Deleted member 1487

Or, way earlier. Like 1930. What is Victory to the Axis anyway? Total world domination?
No, they weren't even going for that. It would be the conquest of Europe for Germany and finally digesting China for Japan.
 
Or, way earlier. Like 1930. What is Victory to the Axis anyway? Total world domination?

Victory is gains in the East and peace. Well, for Germany that is.

Technically even half of Poland would do, without war with the Soviets. You can get that by (somehow) making peace with the UK, or having them not enter in the first place, allowing Germany to carve up Poland.

But that's just a temporary victory because war with the Soviets is close to inevitable. So, realistically, victory needs to involve a land grab for the Soviets and then peace. But Stalin does not seem to have been amenable to a deal with Hitler, so this then becomes getting rid of Stalin (as well as Churchill!), or the long slog to total victory. With peace in the west and no blockade, that might be possible, but it depends on a myriad of factors. The one thing you can say with certainty is that neither side will win quickly, which results in a distinct risk of the war spreading, which is likely to be worse news for Germany than the USSR.
 
I've gone for 1940 as well, in a world where Churchill is no more - e.g. shot down while over France, on one of his visits to the French Government - then with the UK Govt running around like headless chickens, and Halifax's Foreign Office looking for a 'get-out'.
UK agrees to give Germany a 'free-hand' on the Continent, British PoWs will be repatriated in batches - dependant on the delivery of raw materials - oil, aluminium etc.
The UK is also pressured to continue trading with Japan, in exchange for a recognition of the British Empire - apart from the odd adjustment.

So, no supplies the Russia, indeed the British may be pressured to assist with the Campaign in the East - 'we didn't stipulate where the supplies were to land, if we say Riga, it will be Riga!'
 
I voted 1941, but I would have stopped after Operation Mercury (Invasion of Crete) but before Operation Barbarossa
 
I've gone for 1940 as well, in a world where Churchill is no more - e.g. shot down while over France, on one of his visits to the French Government - then with the UK Govt running around like headless chickens, and Halifax's Foreign Office looking for a 'get-out'.
UK agrees to give Germany a 'free-hand' on the Continent, British PoWs will be repatriated in batches - dependant on the delivery of raw materials - oil, aluminium etc.
The UK is also pressured to continue trading with Japan, in exchange for a recognition of the British Empire - apart from the odd adjustment.

So, no supplies the Russia, indeed the British may be pressured to assist with the Campaign in the East - 'we didn't stipulate where the supplies were to land, if we say Riga, it will be Riga!'

I imagine you would think Lord Halifax and his Majesty's Government would also provide personal blowjobs for Hitlers bodyguards, in between pints of lead tea.
 
Really the best way for Germany to win the war is to convince the British in 1940 (which is the year I selected) and then stop there. The British would be looking to throw the knife at the first opportunity they get (they'll definitely conceive of the peace as in the style of the Peace of Amiens), so the key to stopping the war is to not give them an opportunity to throw the knife. That means don't invade the Soviet Union.

This would leave Germany able to conduct the necessary demobilizations' and re-establishment of their overseas trade links to stabilize their economy and finances. Stalin may have the Red Army rebuilt by '42-'43, but without a preexisting general war in Europe he'll be singularly unwilling to attack for fear of uniting Germany and the Anglo-Americans against him. Maybe he'll smack the Japanese off of continental Asia if they still go crazy over there, but that will be the limit of it. Eventually the bomb gets invented and the world basically settles into a multi-polar Cold War, albeit one which probably involves more trade between the various power blocs.

Sure, this isn't an Axis victory in the tradition of "Nazi Germany stretches from the Urals to the Atlantic" but then that is because that kind of victory is off in alien space bats territory.

Of course, to prevent Germany from hauling off and attacking the USSR, you have to get rid of the Nazis (or at least Hitler) somehow between summer 1940 and June 1941. In other words, you have to get rid of the Nazis/Hitler during the height of their popularity which will undoubtedly be even higher ITTL in the aftermath of forcing Britain out of the war. Aside from the always popular "he gets gored by a mountain goat", good luck with that.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

I imagine you would think Lord Halifax and his Majesty's Government would also provide personal blowjobs for Hitlers bodyguards, in between pints of lead tea.
Remember appeasement? Halifax was part of that policy and wanting a deal to end the war in 1940.
 
Remember appeasement? Halifax was part of that policy and wanting a deal to end the war in 1940.

In 1940, appeasement was dead with everybody, Halifax included, and ultimately Halifax hated Hitler as much as Churchill. Halifax was quite clearly in favor of using a deal in 1940 as a means to buy time to restart the fight in the tradition of the Peace of Amiens. While Halifax would have accepted a generous peace, there is no chance he would have signed a surrender. Essentially, he would have the British sullenly retreat back to their island with the loss of their continental allies, build up their military over the next year, and then restart the war once Hitler looked vulnerable (that is, once he attacked the USSR). All Hitler would have bought himself with a favourable peace with Britain would have been a short respite during which the British would have continued frantically re-arming while looking for any opportunity to plunge in the knife.
 
Do two things.

1) Defeat Britian more thoroughly in France.

2) Give them a golden BB where Hitler and few of deputies bite the dust.

More defeated Britian and more trustworthy German leadership equals a chance, though not a good one for peace.
 

Deleted member 1487

In 1940, appeasement was dead with everybody, Halifax included, and ultimately Halifax hated Hitler as much as Churchill. Halifax was quite clearly in favor of using a deal in 1940 as a means to buy time to restart the fight in the tradition of the Peace of Amiens. While Halifax would have accepted a generous peace, there is no chance he would have signed a surrender. Essentially, he would have the British sullenly retreat back to their island with the loss of their continental allies, build up their military over the next year, and then restart the war once Hitler looked vulnerable (that is, once he attacked the USSR). All Hitler would have bought himself with a favourable peace with Britain would have been a short respite during which the British would have continued frantically re-arming while looking for any opportunity to plunge in the knife.
Got a source on Halifax's opinions?
 
Top